A Usability Study of Two Radiotherapy Devices Based on Expert Evaluation and User Testing

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1007-7375.2019.04.010

Abstract

Abstract: To explore the user interface usability design of two kinds of radiotherapy devices and identify the existence of usability issues and use errors, a study is conducted from the point of expert evaluation and the user subjective experience in operation, evaluating the usability design of the radiotherapy device. In expert evaluation, NPRTS accelerator discovered a total of 47 usability issues, and 186 heuristic violations. Hm-J-16-1 accelerator discovered 45 usability problems and 226 heuristic violations. Patient setup and beam delivery are steps in identifying many usability issues, and beam delivery is the most risky radiotherapy step. In terms of workload of participants, Hm-J-16-1 accelerator is higher than NPRTS accelerator. In the perception usability of participants, the Hm-J-16-1 accelerator is lower than NPRTS accelerator. There are several flaws in the usability design of the user interface of two kinds of domestic radiotherapy devices. Manufacturers should further optimize the interface design and enhance the safety and comfort of the device.

Key words: radiotherapy devices, user interface, usability, workload

CLC Number:

JIANG Mingyin, WANG Xiaoyong, FU Yan, ZHANG Qiang, FENG Qingmin, LIU Shenglin. A Usability Study of Two Radiotherapy Devices Based on Expert Evaluation and User Testing[J]. Industrial Engineering Journal , 2019, 22(4): 64-70.

References

[1] MARKS L B, LIGHT K L, HUBBS J L, et al. The impact of advanced technologies on treatment deviations in radiation treatment delivery[J]. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 2007, 69(5):1579-1586
[2] HUQ M S, FRAASS B A, DUNSCOMBE P B, et al. The report of task group 100 of the AAPM:application of risk analysis methods to radiation therapy quality management[J]. Medical Physics, 2016, 43(7):4209-4262
[3] MARJANOVIC N S, DE SIMONE A, JEGOU G, et al. A new global and comprehensive model for ICU ventilator performances evaluation[J]. Annals of Intensive Care, 2017, 7(1):68
[4] MCCRORY B, LOWNDES B R, LAGRANGE C A, et al. Comparative usability testing of conventional and single incision laparoscopic surgery devices[J]. Human Factors:The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2013, 55(3):619-631
[5] SPAETH J, SCHWEIZER T, SCHMUTZ A, et al. Comparative usability of modern anaesthesia ventilators:a human factors study[J]. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2017, 119(5):1000-1008
[6] ZHANG J, JOHNSON T R, PATEL V L, et al. Using usability heuristics to evaluate patient safety of medical devices[J]. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 2003, 36(1-2):23-30
[7] 刘力卓, 张文, 何明, 等. 基于人机工程学的牙科椅舒适度改善研究[J]. 工业工程, 2018, 21(3):103-111 LIU Lizhuo, ZHANG Wen, HE Ming, et al. An improvement research on comfort of dental chair based on ergonomics[J]. Industrial Engineering Journal, 2018, 21(3):103-111
[8] CHAN A J, ISLAM M K, ROSEWALL T, et al. Applying usability heuristics to radiotherapy systems[J]. Radiotherapy & Oncology, 2012, 102(1):142-147
[9] NIELSEN J. Usability heuristics[M]//NIELSEN J. Usability engineering. San Diego:Academic Press, Inc., Harcourt Brace & Company, 1993, 115-164.
[10] HART S G, STAVELAND L E. Development of NASA-TLX (task load index):results of empirical and theoretical research[J]. Advances in Psychology, 1988, 52:139-183
[11] RUBIO S, DIAZ E, MARTIN J, et al. Evaluation of subjective mental workload:a comparison of SWAT, NASA-TLX, and workload profile methods[J]. Applied Psychology, 2004, 53(1):61-86
[12] CARAYON P, WETTERNECK T B, HUNDT A S, et al. Observing nurse interaction with infusion pump technologies[M/OL]//HENRIKSEN K, BATTLE J B, MARKS E S, et al. Advances in patient safety:from research to implementation. Rockville:Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2005, 2:349-364.[2018-09-13]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21249836.
[13] YOUNG M S, BROOKHUIS K A, WICKENS C D, et al. State of science:mental workload in ergonomics[J]. Ergonomics, 2015, 58(1):1-17
[14] LEWIS J R. Psychometric evaluation of the PSSUQ using data from five years of usability studies[J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2002, 14(3):463-488
[15] SCHUTTE J, GALES S, FILIPPONE A, et al. Evaluation of a telerehabilitation system for community-based rehabilitation[J]. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 2012, 4(1):15-24
[16] GORGES M, WINTON P, KOVAL V, et al. Evaluation of an expert system for detecting ventilatory events during anesthesia in a human patient simulator[C]//Proceedings of the 2012 Society for Technology in Anesthesia Annual Meeting. Florida:Society for Technology in Anesthesia, 2012.
[17] MAZUR L M, MOSALY P R, JACKSON M, et al. Quantitative assessment of workload and stressors in clinical radiation oncology[J]. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 2012, 83(5):571-576
[18] CHAN A J, MOHAMMAD K, ROSEWALL T, et al. The use of human factors methods to identify and mitigate safety issues in radiation therapy[J]. Radiotherapy & Oncology, 2010, 97(3):596-600
[19] MARKS L B, JACKSON M, XIE L, et al. The challenge of maximizing safety in radiation oncology[J]. Practical Radiation Oncology, 2011, 1(1):2-14